CCPR/C/114/D/2343/2014 4.3 The State party adds that the Board found that the author had not been able either to support with evidence the information about the Egyptian authorities having turned up at his mother’s home, or to substantiate why the authorities would visit his mother to look for him. In this regard, the Board also observed that the author had left Egypt legally on 15 October 2012 and had not returned there since. The Board also observed that the general reports and articles produced by the author did not contain information substantiating the allegation that he had been personally persecuted by the authorities or anyone else in his country of origin. As a result, the Board found that he did not meet the conditions for being granted a residence permit under section 7 of the Aliens Act. Although the Board accepted the author’s information that he had been one of the founders of Ultras Ahlawy and that he had been in charge of the group’s information technology, it did not and still does not find that, solely by being one of the founders of Ultras Ahlawy and in charge of the group’s information technology, considering that the group was originally an apolitical fan club that later developed into one with a political objective, the author has become a high-profile figure to the extent that he will be at risk of persecution. In this connection, the Board referred to the statement of the author that he had neither been present during the Port Said incident nor during any of the other clashes between the authorities and demonstrators. 4.4 The State party further notes that the Board referred to the author’s statement that, prior to his lawful departure from Egypt, he had not had any conflicts with the Government or other groupings in Egypt. Moreover, the Board did not accept as a fact the author’s information about the Egyptian authorities having turned up at his mother’s home, because this information was not supported by evidence. As regards the author’s statement that the Board’s background material on the situation in Egypt had not been updated since 26 June 2013, the State party observes that Egypt is one of the countries in “Group II”, and that the background material is only updated when a person from that country applies for asylum in Denmark.7 Before its decision, the Board had updated its background material on Egypt and was therefore aware of the most recent developments in the country, including the fact that the Muslim Brotherhood lost power in July 2013.8 4.5 As regards the author’s statement that a member of Ultras Ahlawy had been killed by the police while another member of the group had been arrested and charged with having participated in the Port Said massacre, the State party observes that this information has not been supported by evidence. This finding is supported by the author’s own statement that he and the other founders were not well-known figures. According to the State party, none of the current background information on Egypt gives any basis for assuming that members of Ultras Ahlawy are generally at any particular risk of being subjected to abuse from the authorities or from supporters of the Muslim Brotherhood. The Board included all relevant information in its decisions, and the communication has not brought to light any information substantiating that the author will risk persecution or asylum-relevant abuse upon return to Egypt. The State party observes that, on 6 January 2014, the author submitted an e-mail request that the Board reopen the asylum proceedings. As a reason for his request, the author referred to, inter alia, his fears that, as a co-founder 7 8 6 The State party explains that it keeps background material on countries whose nationals apply to Denmark for asylum. The countries are divided into Groups I and II: the countries in Group I are those from which Denmark receives or has received a considerable number of asylum seekers, and for which background material is continually updated and supplemented; the countries in Group II are those from which Denmark receives or has received only a few asylum seekers, and for which material is updated only if a person from one of them applies for asylum in Denmark. Consequently, some time may pass between updates. The Danish Refugee Appeals Board considers it very important that the background material be of a high quality and enable the Board to form a correct and objective impression of conditions in the individual countries. The State party does not provide further information on this.